From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Harald van Dijk Subject: Re: [PATCH] \e in "echo" and "printf" builtins Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 18:52:51 +0200 Message-ID: <53AEF2E3.5080205@gigawatt.nl> References: <20140628045653.GA5097@angband.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hosting12.csv-networks.nl ([84.244.151.104]:33387 "EHLO hosting12.csv-networks.nl" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751309AbaF1ROL (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Jun 2014 13:14:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140628045653.GA5097@angband.pl> Sender: dash-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: dash@vger.kernel.org To: Adam Borowski Cc: dash@vger.kernel.org On 28/06/14 06:56, Adam Borowski wrote: > Hi! > > I'm not sure what's your policy towards extensions, but \e as \033 is > something ubiquitous in the Unix world. C compilers (gcc, clang, icc and > tcc -- but not MSVC), perl, shells (bash and zsh -- but not dash), etc. > > What about supporting it in dash as well? > Patch attached. Hi, No comment on whether dash itself should accept \e, but you already found a compiler that doesn't support it at all, and many of the ones that do support it also (optionally) issue a warning for it. Should the C code perhaps be using \033 instead of \e? Cheers, Harald van Dijk